Community Chat

[Johnnyeager]

When was that picture made? $17.7 billion was Walmart's income from continuing operations in fiscal 2013, but that fell to $16.5 billion for fiscal 2014.

[betteb]

On 3/3/2015 feline groovy said:

On 3/2/2015 GoodStuff said:

It probably means that Walmart hires quite a few inadequately educated, socially disadvantaged people who without Walmart wouldn't have jobs at all and would be totally dependent on the rest of us for everything.

And as another poster has pointed out, "received" is misspelled.......in a sign probably composed and printed by an inadequately educated social activist related to the aforementioned Walmart employees.

There, but for the grace of God, go you - or any of us.

[Mominohio]

On 3/3/2015 terrier3 said:

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

On 3/3/2015 terrier3 said:

Walmart has been compelled by several factors to raise wages and also (and maybe even more importantly) to make schedules more consistent for their employees.

Back in the day, the workers would have unionized a long time ago and achieved these benefits through collective bargaining.

Now that unions have been demonized by so many - the only way to force change is through outside groups that expose their practices and by lowered earning reports. It's a fact that Walmart's sales have been flat for quite a while. I'm sure they surveyed many shoppers to discover the reason why before they decided to raise wages and standardize hours.

<em>They are doing it because it will be good for business</em>.

That is why business does anything, including charity. It is all about the bottom line, which is not all evil. The more money made, the more they can do for workers, the economy, charity, contributing to the tax base, etc.

Business don't exist for any other reason than to turn a profit. If paying workers more will help that, they will do it.

You are right about business being there to make money.

But there used to be a union movement in the USA that tempered the "money above everything" workplace with collective bargaining for living wages, decent hours, safe work conditions, etc.

We need both to be successful, IMO.

Henry Ford doubled workers' pay so they would be able to afford his cars. That spirit seems to be lost now.

Unions have, over time, cut their own throats. What once was necessary to protect the worker from atrocities, became a bought and paid for (by the companies) organization that took money from the companies as well as the workers (dues) and sold the worker out.

They didn't protect the jobs, they forced industry to retain workers who didn't perform, stole, and corrupted the workforce. They are a responsible party in the moving of our manufacturing over seas. I place blame on the American worker, and the company owners as well, but will never support the unions of 'today' as a friend of the worker.

[Stella Dallas]

What a lot of being said on this thread is, "If you're poor, unemployed or underemployed, it's your own fault because you're lazy, stupid, etc." People say it in code but the message comes through loud and clear. I hate this attitude, "us vs. them". It's really disheartening to know Americans can be so hard-hearted.

[terrier3]

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

O

Unions have, over time, cut their own throats. What once was necessary to protect the worker from atrocities, became a bought and paid for (by the companies) organization that took money from the companies as well as the workers (dues) and sold the worker out.

They didn't protect the jobs, they forced industry to retain workers who didn't perform, stole, and corrupted the workforce. They are a responsible party in the moving of our manufacturing over seas. I place blame on the American worker, and the company owners as well, but will never support the unions of 'today' as a friend of the worker.

OK...you think unions are corrupt and outmoded.

So is gvt. oversight the solution?

I prefer that workers and companies hash out their own labor contracts, without the necessity to raise the minimum wage by gvt. decree.

Back in the day (not so long ago really) there wasn't such a huge disparity between pay to the rank & file and management. Managers seemed to instinctively know that a happy workforce - who felt appreciated by sharing in the company's profits - boosted not only morale but also sales.

There has to be two opposing forces to balance worker pay, safety and morale with company profits.

[straykatz]

Walmart among other hugely profitable business is a perfect example that the trickle down effect is non-existant despite the people who tried to convince voters of a trickle-down economy last time around.

[Stella Dallas]

On 3/3/2015 straykatz said:

Walmart among other hugely profitable business is a perfect example that the trickle down effect is non-existant despite the people who tried to convince voters of a trickle-down economy last time around.

It wasn't called Voodoo Economics for nothing.

[Mominohio]

On 3/3/2015 terrier3 said:

On 3/3/2015 mominohio said:

O

Unions have, over time, cut their own throats. What once was necessary to protect the worker from atrocities, became a bought and paid for (by the companies) organization that took money from the companies as well as the workers (dues) and sold the worker out.

They didn't protect the jobs, they forced industry to retain workers who didn't perform, stole, and corrupted the workforce. They are a responsible party in the moving of our manufacturing over seas. I place blame on the American worker, and the company owners as well, but will never support the unions of 'today' as a friend of the worker.

OK...you think unions are corrupt and outmoded.

So is gvt. oversight the solution?

I prefer that workers and companies hash out their own labor contracts, without the necessity to raise the minimum wage by gvt. decree.

Back in the day (not so long ago really) there wasn't such a huge disparity between pay to the rank & file and management. Managers seemed to instinctively know that a happy workforce - who felt appreciated by sharing in the company's profits - boosted not only morale but also sales.

There has to be two opposing forces to balance worker pay, safety and morale with company profits.

Government NO NO NO!

And the two opposing forces idea is, unfortunately necessary (should't people be able to do what is right, fair, without being forced? But it often doesn't happen, I know). Those two forces are the company, and the worker. Workers who aren't well paid, aren't given the benefits they need, will walk. They will go to someone who knows how to attract and keep good help. Competition will raise the bar. Original employer either looses out and goes out of business, or does what is necessary for the business to survive and thrive. It doesn't always take a third party to be involved. Third parties like unions and government have agendas that get in the way of either of the two originals getting what they need.

[brii]

These are always such horrible threads. I guess the OP got what she wanted...

[Mominohio]

On 3/3/2015 Stella Dallas said:

On 3/3/2015 straykatz said:

Walmart among other hugely profitable business is a perfect example that the trickle down effect is non-existant despite the people who tried to convince voters of a trickle-down economy last time around.

It wasn't called Voodoo Economics for nothing.

Trickle down does work. I've never cashed a paycheck from a 'poor' man. If these businesses didn't exist, where would all those people find jobs? If small, locally owned business took over the gap of these now missing huge corporations, how much better would the pay and benefits be? While small business does provide most new jobs and employment in most areas, they aren't notorious for high wages and Cadillac benefit packages either.